Here are headlines from two different promotions for two different products in the same category: prostate supplements designed to reduce prostate swelling and eliminate urination problems:

A. Male urination problems?

B. Pee like a firehose.

Which approach do you think works better … and why?

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 11th, 2007 at 8:01 am
and is filed under General.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

I’d go with B, for the same reasons stated in #1. I had this same problem with a client’s website today, in fact. Their headline stated the problem they wanted to solve for customers. But they didn’t mention the solution until 2 paragraphs down!

If I want a solution for a problem – especially a potentially-embarrassing one – I don’t want to hear more about the problem. I want to get a solution, fast!

Admittedly, “A” identifies the content of the article better. However, what good is copy if no one reads it?

On the other hand, “B” will entice readers to indulge in the text itself. And even if those with prostate/urination problems don’t see it, the headline should create some buzz and cause people to tell other people.

I loved “B”, and if I saw that on a billboard, I’d definitely give it a longer stare than I would “A”. For me, it comes down to the benefit thing — “Have urinary problems?” is OK as a qualifier question, and maybe as an attention getter, but “Pee like a firehose” is better. Not only because it’s refreshingly frank, but it’s a straight benefit any male with this condition is going see, think “I wish…how?” and keep reading.

If I have a prostate problem, the ad with Headline A will catch my attention. Because no matter how much I don’t want to admit to having prostate problem, deep down inside I still know the condition exists. By directly stating the problem, the ad allows me to know immediately what is it talking about, and then I’ll read the rest of it. Usually I’m not keen to spend time reading things that doesn’t address my needs.

B is interesting, I agree. But I really wouldn’t be bothered with jokes when I’m having a medical condition. It’s very likely that I may not even associate it with my prostate problem, and thus I might just give the ad a miss. My conclusion is: B intrigues ad people. A works on the common guy.

I agree with Ben, who suggested a test with a combination of the two ideas. Also, I wonder if “racehorse” would beat “firehose.” (I’d move ahead with the former if I had to pick between the two without testing.)

Last time I looked, the “Wall Street Journal” was capable of running three-way split run tests. So an a/b/c test could look like this:

Hi everyone,
just a little note to let you know that the audio MP3’s I promised you for Scientific Advertising are ready for you to download. You can help yourself to the first three chapters completely free or (I must be crazy doing this…)…

[…] https://www.bly.com/blog/?p=221 Here are headlines from two different promotions for two different products in the same category: prostate supplements designed to reduce prostate swelling and eliminate urination problems: […]

B sounds like too much hype. I don’t think making an over-the-top, unbelievable claim right from the start is going to gain the prospects trust. It’s the kind of heading I’d expect in a spam email, and how many of those get read, and *believed*?

I think B works because it gets into the head of someone with male urination problems. To most of us, going to the loo is a break in the day. Put yourself in the shoes of someone with urinary incontinence and you feel discomfort, shame, and self doubt. Being able to pee like a firehose may seem funny to people without the problem, but to a person with incontinence it sounds like a miracle. Hence good advertising.